| Abstrakt: |
After the hearing of the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) and the Swiss Federal Tribunal (SFT), some athletes brought their complaints against their decisions before the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). In Mutu and Pechstein case, the ECtHR held that there was a violation of Article 6 (1) of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) on the ground that the CAS held no public hearing. This judgment played a significant role in opening a door for athletes to have access to the ECtHR. However, the ECHR does not impose any legal obligations on sports governing bodies, but on states parties, because they are private entities established by national private law. In this context, it is worth noting that states parties must implement positive obligations under the ECHR to protect athletes from human rights violations caused by nonstate actors under the ECtHR's jurisprudence. In other words, the ECHR may indirectly apply to the private relationship between non-state actors. In this situation, how can athletes argue a violation of their human rights due to discriminatory measures based on their gender identity and sex characteristics before the ECtHR? To answer this question, this article will consider whether sporting regulations applicable to intersex and transgender athletes are compatible with Article 14 of the ECHR. Through this research, it may serve to identify a possibility that the athletes may bring their complaints under Article 14 of the ECHR before the ECtHR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
